The winner will be allowed to have any number of games purchased for themselves totalling £35 at the most. Currency converters currently state that around $56, if you're not sure and want a comparison.

STEAM prices aren't quite done with a currency converter though, so please check http://www.steamprices.com/uk which will allow you to browse appropriate prices. I'm afraid my card will deny a purchase through steam using VPN to purchase in USD (I tested it.), so I cannot do this. Apologies.

The rule to enter and win this time is quite simply:

I want to know something you hate about games or gaming, that you think is somewhat unique to you, and explain why.

Doesn't necessarily have to be a genre or a gaming cliché.

For example, I absolutely detest Bioshock - quite an unpopular opinion most gamers would agree. Shan't get into reasons here, but I hope you do with your entry - I'd like the winner to at least explain why they think this is a unique opinion to themselves.

The entry I find most interesting will be chosen at 23:59 PM BST tomorrow, 16/05/12.

I absolutely detest turning successful game franchises into mmo's. The most offending title is The Old Republic, I played the free trial and liked it, but not enough to pay a full price+monthly subscription for it. It could be a great single player RPG, but no, they had to make it an mmo in an attempt to milk more cash out of players. Eh. When I see stuff like The Elder Scrolls or Fallout mmo, I cringe. I don't know of any franchise, except Warcraft, that benefitted from the switch to mmo.

Eh, that turned out a bit more whiny that I expected.

I'm really interested in why you don't like Bioshock, I haven't played it yet and from what I gathered from reviews and gameplays so far, it is not so special to me.

I'm starting to hate Minecraft. The game has almost zero single player potential, except for this whole ender dragon thing notch strapped onto it. Multiplayer is fun, but it seems like so much more could be achievable with the game. Minecraft could benefit from real NPCs, with story lines and something that'll keep you interested in the game. More use for the crafting mechanics.

Plus, it seems like the game is a cliche at this point. Everyone knows what Minecraft is, and they've just accepted that it is the way it is. But I feel like the game has so much potential that just hasn't been touched yet. Quests, NPCs... It could turn into a really great game. Even such a simple quest such as "Build a wall around our village" would make the game interesting, as you could help the villagers out or leave them to suffer the onslaught of creatures when night falls.

I'm not saying we need to turn it into Skyrim. But for a game that is so free form and open, it sure seems empty. I want my games to draw me in, give me a unique experience, and then keep me playing. Minecraft just doesn't do it.

It isn't really that genre though. It's a builder game, like playing with LEGO(R) Bricks. You make your own adventure, really. While it is easy to say "it had so much potential", It's much more logical to say either a) "I don't like how Notch tried to go in a pseudo-RPG direction, because the game has a poor identity and isn't as well fleshed out as it should be" or b) "it doesn't appeal to me". There's also the updates. Notch once said that "Mojang charges for unfinished games because Mojang games are never finished".

My main point is it just seems like Notch doesn't know where to point the game to keep it interesting. Obviously they want to continue expanding on Minecraft, but they've been unsure on what direction. It's pretty much complete as a building game, so they've been taking baby steps into the RPG realm. I feel as if the game has potential in the rpg-realm, but it just hasn't been fully realized. And while making your own adventure can be fun, I don't feel the same draw to the game as I used to. I think it can get old after a while. As you stated, the updates are one of the best aspects of the game, and will hopefully build upon the game's potential.

True... I do want to point out that Notch isn't even working on the game anymore. It's Jeb now, and I think Jeb has a better vision/sense of direction for the game. Notch, at least to me, seemed to just be "I'm gunna make the best game ever. Even though that did work out for him for a while, it isn't good as a long term strategy. Now Jeb has to "clean up that trash", and hopefully get a good game out.

I hate the way the gaming industry has turned out, back in its youth it was vibrant with new ideas coming at you left right and centre. It had celebrity - I would look forward to games by certain programmers or music by certain musicians. It was an exciting time!

These days its like most games all come from the same factory with cookie cut everything, hardly any original ideas - everybody is playing it safe, the days of excitement and celebrity have long gone and that makes me sad, when you look at what the medium could offer its a bit of a tragedy.

Something unique? I have a large birthmark in the shape of a strawberry in the centre of my chest! If I win Ill up a pic lol

I hate how no matter what game you're playing you can't pause during cut-scenes or dialogue. I always find myself being asked to do something or need to go to the bathroom (or something of the sort) during the middle of some important, un-pauseable part of the game.

Another thing that really bothers me is how hostile the online/multiplayer environment is for many games. I don't want to be beat down, cussed out, and generally treated like crap JUST because I made a mistake or am still learning the game. It's a game, it's supposed to be fun. It doesn't have to be super competitive nor is it the end of the world if someone makes a mistake.

I hate and cannot play games that are too "open world." Its why I never finished GTA IV despite pre-ordering the collectors edition and why Far Cry 2 hasnt been played for more than 45 minutes total. Im a compulsive collector and searcher, I have to find the secret areas and I have to see everything. Games like that just take far too long for me to get anything done in. I think it has more to do with the lack of direct unified line of progression, if there isnt a main quest line I can follow that leads me to any sidequests then I am going to have a bad time. I dont wanna have to search every square inch of the map multiple times to see if new quests/missions/events have opened up. I should be able to play it and figure stuff out myself and get all the enjoyment out of the game that is possible. I dont want to have to check a wiki to find out the coords i have to be at and at what time in order to get the story on what happens to random Joe Bloggs NPC.

My main gripe with gaming now days is how has DLC attached to it. Nothing bothers me more than seeing a company with planned DLC already ready a month after the game launched, to me it's with holding content at a price to loyal customers. I simply refuse to buy DLC now days since I feel it's cheating the consumer.

I hate the skanky bitches in games that are expected to fight in that.

League of Legends for example, look at all the women in that game, dressed in nurse outfits, ass-less chaps, so on so forth, one cut from any champion with a blade, and they would be laying on the ground with no intestines.

Short but simple one from me. I HATE it when games don't allow you to change the controls or let you map what keys/buttons you want. Obviously PC games have the advantage of being able to edit .ini files but you shouldn't have to do that. Nothing puts me off a game more than bad controls and it annoys so much that the developers couldn't be bothered to come up with a few alternatives or let you make your own.

Well yes sometimes the controls are done in a way to help benefit the game, such as Loco Roco using the shoulder buttons as away to tilt the screen, but I'm not on about those kind of controls. Most games have to give alternatives, like controls for left handed people, but not all games do which becomes really inconvenient for the gamer and can makes them feel left out (no pun intended).

I hate it when people hate games just because other people hate them/they have bad graphics. I also hate when people diss games because they don't like them. For example. I had a "friend" who said all 8 bit games have shitty graphics, they have bad gameplay mechanics, and the just generally suck.

Batman recent series, like Arkham Asylum and City. I simply can't play it. I bought Asylum on steam and played a good part of the game (something like 4~6 hours played) but I can't go further. Tha game is that much plain and always the same thing rolling on. I don't know exactly why, but I can't enjoy the game.

I really don't like Skyrim. It's not a horrible game, and I don't think the story is too bad, but the gameplay and controls are horrible. Especially fighting. It's basically bash with sword. Back up. Blast with some fire. Forward. Bash with sword and it never changes. The shouts are mediocre at best and the story is short. The game relies on side quests because without them the game wouldn't be worth much because of the short length of the main one. Just my two cents and entry :)

This is what I found also. I was going to write about it but saw you basically had the same opinion as me. It was entertaining to me as a sandbox game, not as a RPG, but even then the novelty wore off after a few hours of playtime

I don't know if we're allowed to enter this if we lost last time, but here it goes.

I have always had a passion for gaming, but over the years I have come to terms with the fact that not one great thing in the world has no faults.

My main gripe with gaming, and this is a big one, is how hard it can be to finish a game.

Now bare with me. I have OCD, so specific things can bother to an extent that I get very uncomfortable, even angry. So naturally I am a completionist when it comes to gaming. This has carried over to every game I have ever played.

Over the years you start to develop a tolerance to the enjoyment of games, that is why personally I have become a lot more picky in terms of what I play.

I don't like to hoard games because they can become a very significant problem if I do not complete them. Meaning any kind of game I get no matter how bad I complete at one point in time.

This drives me absolutely insane. Often I can't do anything at all until I scratch that itch.

I have very conflicting feelings because of this. On who hand I love super long games and on the other hand they drive me nuts because I have to beat them 100%.

One thing that really frustrates me in gaming is the lack of maturity in gaming content, in particular the objectification of women. By maturity, I don't mean "M for Mature"; I mean being able to be appreciated by a more mature audience. As I've gotten older, I don't really like seeing women objectified in a game. When I was 13, sure, bring on the boobs. Now, though, if I see female armor that reveals tons of cleavage, it breaks the game world. What's the point? That armor wouldn't do any good! I know they still have those kind of things in games because they are being marketed to teenagers, but gamers are getting older now, and I'm sick of my favorite hobby not being taken seriously because of how they objectify women (among other things). I find gratuitous nudity that serves no purpose to detract from a game's experience.

This doesn't seem like a very unique viewpoint - what people in the world enjoy having themselves pushed around?

On another note, there was an interesting study done at some point - I'd find it if I could be bothered - about how players like to have their own space in MMOs, virtuality and everyone stands in their own space and doesn't like other players poking in on where they're standing, very rarely do players enjoy overlap.

I hate any game that uses Orcs, as the enemy. They are so overused that its a cliche now. Seriously, where is the creativity? It gets me really angry how they are used as the standard enemy in most fantasy games.
I mean, whats the point? Why take an enemy that is so bland and use it in your games? Makes no sense to me.

You totally misunderstand me. If the game is nazi or zombie based, like L4D, then duh you gotta use zombies. But if you have the chance to create a whole new race of monsters, why go with orcs when you can be so much more creative?

I have a huge tolerance for almost everything. But there is one thing I can't stand and it's gamers who can't let go of the past. Nostalgia clogs their judgement and all they want are remakes and old gaming conventions in a new era of games. They can't accept change and are oomfortable with the same old.

My roommate and I are avid gamers. Maybe not diverse because we only use the PC and XBOX 360, but we game every day.

Anyway, my roommate has a habit of blaming the game for everything that goes wrong for him in the game. "What the fuck, my attack just went right through him! The game just decided 'nope'!" is a pretty common expression around my apartment.

It really pisses me off. He gets so mad at the game, or the controller, that he'll end up smashing something. He's really the only person I've seen that gets violent, but I've seen plenty of people blame the game for their misfortune.

There are a few reasons that I dislike gaming, but they boil down to a common theme. The community. There are a lot of reasons to be let down, but for the most part, there is a lot of community issues that I can only describe as disappointing.

Foremost, herd mentality is a massive issue within the gaming community. I actually wrote an ethnography about geek culture for my cultural anthropology class and that was one of the larger issues I mentioned. Geek and gamer culture suffers greatly from it's need to seek comfort from it's own shortcomings, whether social, emotional, or financial, by creating these bonds formed through mutual acceptance of certain "gaming truths". A fine place to observe this is /r/gaming. Take one look there and you can see this in action. It's a natural part of being human, trying to find like-minded persons; however, gamers are likely to sacrifice free-thinking and their own opinions in order to be a part of a subculture with which they identify.

Another problem I see, one I don't see here because most of reddit aren't complete assholes (at least the places I frequent), is the segregation and isolation of certain gamer populations. Geeks as a whole have a need for bringing more and more people into the fold, but gamers are unique in that they usually seek only certain types that fit into their particular niche. Competitive players, generally, seek more competition, noobs and terribad players need to step aside. More casual players tend to stick together, avoiding strict competition with others. This, of course, also tends to lead to sexism as competitive males usually view women as weak and unskilled. This also leads to the final issue I have.

Verbal and emotional abuse is a problem. Some people laugh it off as being a part of the scene. That if you're offended, you're just being a baby. Personally, I dislike hearing someone tell me to "get raped". Or saying that "I should sit the fuck down and eat my dick-breakfast". It's not funny, it's idiotic, divisive, and leads to a decreased desire for newer people to indulge in their curiosity to try out certain games. I know I'll never play on Xbox Live again after hearing my 12 year old (at the time) step-daughter being told to "shut the fuck up and get out of the game" because she was a young girl. This pervasive sense of entitlement to say whatever we want to whomever we are playing with, or against, over the internet and voice chat is absolutely my number one problem with gaming. It's childish, ridiculous, and simply serves to undo a sense of community that gamers, at large, actually truly crave.

Anyway, I could write a multi-page essay on the subject, so I'll just leave it at this. Gaming suffers from those who use it as their means of self-actualization.

Not sure if my little diatribe was outside the rules, so I'll leave it here, and write something different in case what I wrote before wasn't correctly positioned. I do believe that the above is underdiscussed, leading me to believe that it's become accepted as the norm and that others don't find offense in them, or lay their hatred in them, the way that I do.

One thing about gaming that I think is generally accepted, but that I hate, is the need for realism. The pursuit of realism. I love video games for their outlandishness! I don't want too much realism in my games. Give me cell shading. Give me cartoonishness. I want my guy to take 100 hits to die.

I just know there are a lot of people who take that kind of trash talking as a compliment and see abuse as the natural order of multiplayer gaming. I feel like an oddball when I play games and pay my opponents compliments. It brings me a ton of joy when someone plays nice, though. Seeing a "nice shot!" or "that was awesome!" is my idea of fun, not "it's like you're playing with your butthole on the mouse, whore". Probably stems from having kids, though. I would hate to see them abuse or be abused by people, so I don't see the reason for it.

As for realism, I just don't like it in my games. It never feels right. I'm lame :(

I hate it when a game has a checkpoint just before a hard boss fight and if you die you have to watch the cut scene again and YOU CAN'T SKIP IT. This happened to me during a fight in Kingdom Hearts during the fight against Riku and I kept getting murdered by him. I got more mad that I had to watch the cut scene a thousand times than actually losing to him. It got to the point where I was mocking everything being said and cussing under my breath so my mom wouldn't hear me.

I hate the tutorial sections of games. The ones that lead you by the hand far too much and explain that a is jump etc. It's embarrassing when a £40 game for instance CoD:MW3 (it's a good example) takes you by the hand for the first 15 minutes showing you explosions, which you have n effect on and teaches you the basic control scheme of a game that most people have played a variant of before.

A better spend of time for devs would be to create better intro levels that make you learn the game without them telling you what to do. For instance you walk up to a barrier. Shit! I can't get over this! You try pushing random buttons and find there's a climb button etc. FAR MORE REWARDING. However, with the loss of game manuals (EA just put the health and safety warnings in boxes nowadays(another problem)) people might not be willing to live with the initial challenge of learning a control scheme, even if they have the internet.

TL;DR I hate tutorials and prefer to learn control schemes organically

Boobs. Yeah I said it. Every game I play that has any female characters, has them hypersexualized and with enormous breasts. This isn't just a problem with games, either. The thing is, in real life, most of the women I know tend to have value beyond their bodies. I just want characters to be more believable sometimes. (If you tried playing The Witcher 1, you know how bad it can get)

The other side of the coin is the ultrahero/super soldier/space marine/one man army trope...come on...even superman had his weakness.

I hate console games on pc.. They are reducing quality of pc games since playstation 2, because big video game companies such as EA and Activision want to make more money with same product. So, today we only have extremely easy, simple logic, undetailed, fancy looking bad port games. Cut scenes, poor dialogs, "push this button over and over again to kill that boss who is choking you now!" moments.. I miss the 90's.

Over the years, Nintendo has become somewhat predictable and formulaic with their releases. For a variety of series, I view this as "ok." I am all for innovation and expansion of games as a whole, but it is refreshing to see a new Mario game that is very similar to previous Mario games with new levels and maybe a new feature. To me, it is similar to the latest development with Portal 2's community maps, which allows people to create maps and for people to download and play them for free. I do wish Nintendo would charge less for their games, but I still believe that it is nice to have something that I can reliably play between other titles that I am waiting for. I understand that, based on sales, this is not a particularly "unique" opinion, but I do believe this is a less commonly shared one.

I hate that games take longer than a few hours to beat. Some of my favorite games of the last year or so, Journey, Dear Esther, Limbo. are not my favorite despite the fact they are short, but in part because they are.

As a busy, working adult I can't find the time to play X00 hours of content, more hours is the farthest thing from added value. I think that the ideal length for a game should be not much longer than a film.

Short games fit my schedule and can be much richer and better developed than games that focus on gratuitous amounts of content.

I'd rather drop 50$ on a beautifully crafted 2 hour game than 10$ on a 300 hour number counting, loot hoarding, or collectible grabbing grindfest.

You point makes some sense to me, and completely loses me at others. Now, it's your opinion, and that's the point of this so I won't say that you're wrong. Opinions aren't wrong - that's the wonderful thing about them. But as a student, with little free time that my fiancee doesn't steal away (she's not a gamer) I still don't quite agree on this sentiment. I think quality is more important than length. But a fun game is a fun game whether it's 3-5 hours long or hundreds of hours. I just get less done in the longer game. XD

To be honest the thing that I am really starting to dislike about these 'modern' games is that now it's just become a competition between which has the better graphics, not which is the better game. I would much prefer a team to focus more on story, gameplay and music, and only do what they need to on the graphical front. I mean, Hl1 was extremely immersive when I first played it, and look at those graphics.

I'm not saying that all modern games shouldn't have good graphics. But it seems to be that a lot of game devs have it as their focus point, instead of making new and better game concepts.

Companies try pretty damn hard to get everything right now on the highest class of games, I feel bad for them really. You just can't satisfy everyone - might as well make something look pretty since that makes you go "ooooh" from the get go. Especially in trailers.

I'm not a fan of Diablo and similar games, really any game that uses the mouse to highlight something and move it, Magicka, Torchlight, and Starcraft are other examples. Something about just sitting and clicking has always bored me in spite of being really interested in the story of the games.

Gets even more frustrating at times like now when I end up occasionally expressing meh towards the biggest games of ever and people get angry at me about it instead of talking to me about why the games are good. But that's less unique to me and more a frustration we all have.

I thought about it a bit more and I realized that the thing, perhaps not super unique to me, but definitely against the grain is that I don't like multiplayer games. I've played them, some of them even a lot, but generally given the choice between playing a single player game by myself and playing with randoms, and even friends sometimes, I'd rather play the single player game. Between the occasionally enormous skill barriers from one player to another, terrible team balancing, and trying to deal with so very many frustratingly horrible people, I just don't like doing it.

Every time I get into a server I get yelled at for being bad, or for screwing up, or for doing too well, there's just nothing that can be done to please people. So instead, I'll retreat to my universe where the only discussion of how good or bad I am is between me, the game, and my life bar.

I'm not a fan of the "PC master race". Console games aren't holding PC gaming back. The developers are. To a developer, it's easier to port a game from a console to the PC or vice versa than to spend the extra time to re-work the game for a platform it is almost guaranteed to not sell as much on. Then, when there are very few instances in which the developer does give the PC special treatment, it tends to be shunned or ignored by the community (though not necessarily on purpose).

2.

Fanboyism

This is controversial to the topic at hand in that I'm fairly certain other people feel like me on this topic, but I feel we are much less than a minority. There was a time a long time ago when I was a shameless fanboy for Nintendo. I would let the hate for Sony and Microsoft flow in arguments, and I look back now and realize how utterly.naive I was. The truth is is that all major console developers have something to offer for everyone. Each console is unique in it's own way. This goes for the PC gaming market, too, especially in Valve vs. Origin. While the customer service may be poor, Origin offers deals and games just like Valve does, so there is no reason to be calling for their company to fall. If you don't like the service, don't use it, and respect that some other people do. Then we'll all get along a lot better.

Im starting to hate in-game purchases more and more. Not like game content add-ons, but cosmetic items. I'm noticing if you have one of these items you receive accusations of "pay-to-win" tactics(I've seen it happen in TF2 and SMNC but im sure it occurs other places.) But if you don't own these items, you receive comments of being poor and things of that nature. You just can't win.

I hate friendly fire in games. Most people seem to love it 'cause "it gives a sense of realism" but I'm really bad at shooters and sometimes I play them for the sake of my friends to have a fun time together once in a while. I keep hurting or killing my friends 'cause of the damn friendly fire :(

probably the replayability of most games. once you beat the game, i dont see what the point of playing it again since its like reading the spoilers before you play it. The only exceptions i could think of were those with multiple story arcs, but even that makes me seem like im wasting time.

I hate successful single player games that get sequels with multiplayer added onto them. Sequels always seem so poor when they get multiplayer. It's probably cause of the time limit when developing games, but then the single player AND multiplayer components become half-assed and rushed. Don't get me wrong, I love playing multiplayer, but I've started to hate online multiplayer just for the sheer fact that every developer seems to think it's necessary for a game to be a success.

Series like Assassin's Creed, God of War (soon), Mass Effect, etc. I've always loved, but I've never dabbled into the multiplayer aspect of the games. It just takes me out of experiencing the storyline. Kicks me out of the moment.

I hate how a female in any multiplayer game can make 80% of the server her slaves if she wanted to, just by using a microphone. I never get tired of pointing this out when it happens and getting votekicked by her "followers." Just because there's a girl in the server doesn't mean you need to treat her any differently than you would a guy. You're not going to get any from the chick you met playing Zombie Master or Counter-Strike, so just fuck off and play the game.

Not trying to be sexist here. It just happens way more than you'd think it would.

I don't enjoy non-linear games. You could say that I hate them. Exploring the worlds isn't very exciting to me and I would rather know exactly what the developers intended for me to do next and exactly where they wanted me to go. I think it comes down to the thought of missing something by not following the ideal order of things. If I'm playing a large RPG I'll almost always use a walkthrough to make sure that I get everything done the "correct" way.

My pet peeves about gaming are the changes that it experiences as the medium becomes more popular and commercial--specifically, an excessive focus on multiplayer, a "dumbing-down" of content, and a focus on pandering to the lowest common denominator of society.

I have noticed these days that the majority of newer games, whether AAA or independent in origin, are highly multiplayer-focused. The most obvious example of this is the extremely popular Call of Duty franchise, which went from a realistic single-player-only WWII shooter to a generic modern-day multiplayer shooter with a lazy, diminutive, and tutorialistic single-player campaign mode tacked on.

This drastic change is probably a result of the ceaseless pursuit of profits: why sell a single-player game to one person when you can sell a multiplayer game to a person and all of his friends?

Anyway, while I enjoy a rambunctious multiplayer game as much as the next person, I prefer single-player games. I love the experience of getting immersed into a story of a gripping single-player game; I love the amount of detail and customization possible in single-player games; I love the length of single-player games. Most of all, I love the fact that you do not need a large group of like-minded people to enjoy a single-player game: I disliked and never finished Portal 2's co-op mode as I could not find any other decent player to struggle through the puzzles with me, and Team Fortress 2 can feel torturous when you are playing with unskilled and disorganized teammates.

The "dumbing-down" of content goes hand-in-hand with this multiplayer trend. Consider the Call of Duty series once more: in a bid to try to regain some gameplay depth in a multiplayer setting, the unlockable perk system was implemented, giving players who play the game more an unfair advantage. If two equally skilled players compete in a game, the player who was played more of the game generally wins as he/she has access to more perks, ruining game balance.

Games are also "dumbed down" to suit the lowest common denominator of gamers. For instance, a game like Myst would never be developed in the modern day, as it would be construed as "too difficult" and "not exciting enough" by today's mass market. My favorite example of this is the Need for Speed games: they began with a focus on exotic cars and police pursuits, then shifted drastically into the "tuner" scene, alienating former fans, like me, to get sales from "Fast and Furious" viewers. These days, the NFS games are more like action movies--consider the story-driven "The Run;" it even has out-of-car play and quick-time events.

Other aspects of games are also designed around the "lowest common denominator" of culture--look at the sexualized female character designs and cardboard-thin stories of recent games. Thick, enjoyable game instruction manuals have been replaced with tiny two-page affairs explaining the controls, turning the game itself into a glorified tutorial, complete with button-press prompts. Some games did it right, however: consider the original Portal, which taught you its game mechanics in a more subtle way.

Sorry for the rant. :P I still love gaming and many recent games, however.

Personally, I hate gaming "journalism". Looks like any kid with an internet connection is an authority these days. The fact that some publishers will reward developers if they score high metascores makes me sick, so much bullshit. I think we would all be better off without game reviews, from IGN to EDGE.

Anyways, thanks for the giveaway. If it's available on the UK, I would like to win Lone Survivor please

I can't stand games that have been hyped up so much. An example of what I mean is when I first heard of Team Fortress 2. I was during my introduction to PC gaming. A friend of mine who had been playing Team Fortress 2 for a while (right now, he has like 450+ hours on it) kept talking about it like it was the best game ever. You see, at the time, as far as I was concerned, the best games ever was Rock Band 1 and 2. No questions asked. So, when my friend explained to me all about the PC master race, any why most games shouldn't be on the console, my rather impressionable mind just tough something along the lines of, "Seems legit". And went off to a wonderful land of internets, and steam sales, and what not. I don't have many games on steam anyway, but whatever.

One day, he went to my house and we went on line, watched T.V., did whatever, when he mentions, that Team Fortress 2 went free to play. So I decide to download it on Steam. After all that hype, there was no doubt in my mind that there would be anything wrong with this game. I figured it would cause the most amazing sensation to ever start from a tingling in my fingers to a orgasmic sensation in my lower back. You could throw the word penis somewhere in there.

After 24 hours, of waiting to download, (I didn't know how Steam worked) I finally got to play it. I first saw the menu and thought, "This looks like sex"! So, I got on that. I got on that so hard. It was incredible how hard I got on that. I'm kidding of course. That was really the day I found out that I suck at First-Person Shooters.

The next time I met up with him, he asked how it was. I just said it was okay. He replied with, "You don't like it, do you". It didn't seem like he was disappointed or anything, he's a pretty stoic guy. But I couldn't bring myself to say I didn't like it. I just sucked at it. It brought me months of frustration, but eventually, I got okay at it. So, it was alright. It just got me bummed at the start because to how hyped up it was.

The reason I think this is unique is because my close friends don't seem to show any emotion involving disappointment. So for a video game, this was pretty new to me. Plus, I was satisfied with whatever at the time. So this was a real let down. At least now that I'm a little better at it, I could enjoy it as much as the next guy.

First off, I'd like to say that I really appreciate your PiF and the fact that you're doing it TWICE! :D

I hate when MMO-ish games have puzzles that don't change somehow each time you do it. I.E. in the Lord of the Rings Online there are 3-man instances in Moria that require you solve certain puzzles (turn this lever to make this happen in the right order thing) to progress. It was so much fun the first time through. But now I try to help people and they just want me to run through it because I've memorized it, or sometimes people will just run through and flip the switches before even asking if the new person wants to try to figure it out. I feel like the puzzle is a wonderful change of pace from the fight fight fight style of those games, but its only maybe a week before its memorized and people just run through it to get back to the fight fight fighting.

So long as it doesn't become so popular that reading through all the entries becomes impossible and I have to resort to doing some gimmick contest instead, I'm thinking about doing one of these per month.

Waypoints, Dlcs, games that are ram intensive because I can't run it on my crappy laptop. Hence I buy a lot of cheap indie games, RPGs arent turned based combat or give you a small party to play with so you have some variety, it's all real time. I like some action based RPGs, but some get to the point where grinding is not necessary and you are pretty strong against everything from the start except some bosses. Lack of near end game secret bosses, those were extremely satisfying to beat, monthly subscriptions, when I was gaming as a lad, when you bought a game, you owned it for life and could play it whenever you wanted, multiplayer games with douche players. It's one of the main reasons I rarely play HoN, dota and dota2 and stick with single player. Oh yeah and required Internet connection for single player

I hate when people say one game of a completely different genre is better than another. My school compares minecraft to skyrim and my girlfriend compares legend of zelda to super mario. It just doesn't make sense!

I absolutely hate Xbox 360 controllers. I grew up playing game boy and ps2 and pc, obviously, and I just hate how big the Xbox controller is. Of course I do have small hands… also I hate the fact that the analogue stick is on the top and the digital one on the bottom. Dual shock controllers are just so much better.

Also don't love it when I get my mate an awesome game (AC Revelations) and he kept telling me he hated it. Some people don't give fucks in these situations apparently.

I enjoy controller input for racing and fighting games, due to the usefulness of analog control and desirability of force-feedback in the two genres. For everything else, however, I strongly prefer mouse and keyboard for its versatility.

It depends on the game I would think. I'm just so much more used to aiming with analogue sticks then with my mouse, also considering that my mouse is bad and sometimes decides to send random waves of movement to the virtual mouse on the screen. Countless times I have raged as a sniper…

I used to go to my mates flat for tekken about ten years ago. I was there everyday. I used his controller x) he was not amused when his relatives visited after summer and his cousin asked him if he had pissed on his controller.

I don't like RPGs where you allocate start points. I don't know why, but I haven't been able to figure out how to do it correctly. I usually end up with an all around which will get me through the game, but it annoys me that I can't figure out the mechanic if it. When I try combinations I think will work I end up with a useless character.

I guess it's my own fault, but it really annoys me that I have yet to figure it out.

What I ABSOLUTELY HATE today, is how much multiplayer there is recently.

What happened to us single-player gamers here? I like multiplayer, and I would play, if I could, but my internet doesn't work all that well (first world small town problems), and I'd rather play singleplayer anyways.

First, I want to start off with something that's probably a bit common. I absolutely do not see the appeal in most FPS's, especially those that revolve around wars, and even moreso historical wars. It glorifies the past that may bring pride, but mostly sadness to the people that remember actually being part of. I'm not even sure how to properly express my feeling about that subject, really.

Now, for something that I believe is unique to me - I don't like how some devs "worship" their fans. I'm not talking about listening to their fans, to improve the playability of their game; but I don't like it when developers let fans influence their decisions, so that they start changing their game and start offering "fanservice". I want to play the game, as it was originally planned, and not a version that has been changed to please the audience. This is especially true with sequels, like with Sonic 2. What if Tails wasn't bashed so much? Would we have more local multiplayer Sega games? Sometimes, I wish devs would just make their games as they imagined it, and stop worrying about what the fans want all the time.

Well, it's probably not a popular opinion, but imagine if authors of books yielded so easily to fans - it wouldn't be any different than reading fanfiction. J.K. Rowling was quite outspoken when telling her fans that Harry Potter was "her" story to tell. Similarly, I definitely lose admiration for games if I know the final product is incomplete (i.e. KotOR 2) or has its canon plot retconned/rebooted to fit the liking of some "fans" (i.e. Tomb Raider).

Right now, it is the "we will release it when it is ready" thing. Everyone always rises up to defend it, but I don't see why. Obviously, the game has to be complete, etc., etc. but I have found many recent games being very playable and fun and releasable, but they won't release just yet so that they can get the game to almost perfection. Yes, I want a good game, however, with the modern age of patches and all, I feel like I can have a good game and start playing earlier. I think I just adopted this opinion because I am going through Guild Wars 2 withdrawal and I think they should just release it :p Also, I think "we will release it when it is ready" is not completely true in many cases. Alot of the time I think it is just the marketing team holding it back so the time is perfect for them to get the most money.

Another thing is expansions/DLC. I know this is really mainstream, but let me tell you my experience with it. I am perfectly fine with release day DLC (not completely fine, but I am pretty indifferent about it). Most of that stuff is cosmetic, and if it isn't I still usually don't care. However, what I do care about is game developers cutting off content that you bought if you don't buy the DLC. I have always loved Bungie. Whenever a new Halo comes out I spend weeks playing nothing but that (We shall see how you fare 343). I have spent more than 350 hours on each of the Halo trilogy. I bought all of the Halo 2 dlc. When halo 3 came out, I played it constantly. The campaign, online, with friends, online with friends, etc. I bought the first 2 or 3 map packs. However, as you can imagine, after over 300 hours with the game I soon grew tired. When the 3rd or 4th map pack (the last one) was released, I didn't really want to buy it. At that point, I stopped playing by myself and I rarely played it with my friends when they came over. However, a few months after that last map pack came out, I wanted to play online with a friend. I could only access two playlists. I had payed over 100$ total for this game (Limited edition + dlc) and to this day I can not play in more than two playlists unless I buy the third or fourth map pack, which I refuse to do. For shame, Bungie/Microsoft, for shame.

Lastly, I absolutely hate steam sales. They are downright criminal. One day I have boatloads of money and the next day I am really poor and I can't figure out why I bought a ton of shit games. I have looked over the list of games I bought in the Winter sale and I only play 2 and I only ever played 5 of the 15 I bought >.> Stupid steam, with its stupidly low prices

That is true, I guess. I never looked at it that way. However, I still have a problem with games taking away features (I loved Big Team Battle in H3 and I can't play that now) just because I didn't buy dlc. Sure, add new playlists, but don't put extra requirements in order to enter old ones.

The internet is too fully suffused by angry grognards for any one complaint to be truly unique.

That said, I'll do my best: I hate Dota.

It's not more rabid fanboyism from a competing MOBA, and it's not even really a thorough hatred.

You see, it's a fantastic game. It's well-designed, with great graphics, an absolutely amazing setting/lore, and supremely robust mechanical integration among what must be 400+ skills. Really, it's a lovely game.

And I freaking loathe it.

Heck, I'll watch the tournament games! But playing it is just so unsatisfying, so damnably futile that I just can't hold an interest. I played for months, months! I did practice games vs. bots in WC3 Dota, before my Dota 2 invite came. So I played more practice matches, and then I played even more practice matches but with my brother's help. Finally, after 50+ games, 30+ hours of reading guides, 10+ hours of watching gameplay videos, I'd finished preparing. I tried a match. It was okay; my team pretty much carried the whole thing, and I just felt useless.

And that continued. Any time we won, I knew it was despite my presence. Any time we lost, I knew that I held more than my fair share of the blame. And it didn't matter. I was putting in 15-20 in-game hours a week (never mind the supplementary reading,) and I simply couldn't compete. It was motherfucking Sisyphean.

Whether other players were treating it like a full-time job or simply held a natural talent for it, I could not stop losing or feeling useless around them. I went back to practice matches and actually went so far as to do last hitting drills. I made a cheat sheet for hotkeys so I could operate the courier and store more quickly. I played yet more games against bots. I re-watched and re-read old guides.

In the end, I was putting 20- to 25-ish hours per week into the game, and there was no reward (save for the occasional Zeus ult kill.) I love the setting, the design, the graphics, the tournament, hell, even the community. But I just can't stand to play another round of Dota.

I hate that it is acceptable to rage and discourage teamwork in multiplayer games. In online games like team fortress2 and dota2 that require an immense amount of teamwork to win, people are quick to call each other noob rather than embracing the idea of teamwork and helping each other put towards a win. I have encountered several people that enjoy demeaning other players as if it were part of playing the game itself, rather, I think of it as savage behavior. The gaming community seems to feed off this demeaning style but misunderstand its importance in teamwork play. I believe this is unique to me as I've had to deal with tough-guys who want to put down fellow team mates while I try to help others. People seem to enjoy flexing their superiority in a game, at the expense of their teammates and this irks me.

I hate about gaming when involving Raciest contents ( Like in COD MW when you have to kill Russians as they are bad guys in this war ) ( or BF when you have to kill some Afghanistans people or arabs as they all are terrorist or bad guys ) .

Also hate when involving too much Sexual contents like GTA or The Witcher 2 or homosexuality like Biowere games . It embarrassing when you play with friends or family members ( At least for me ) .

I think that with very, very few exceptions, WoW is the worst staple of gaming put forward in the last ten years. I'm mainly talking about the influence that WoW has had on the genre, because I don't think the idea of a giant, server based multiplayer world is bad- I just think the ridiculous pandering to a game model of one particular gametype is absurd.

WoW is a good game. I don't think anyone will really argue that- it's just the fact that since it is really the best game in its genre (that being contemporary MMOs, if you want to sort by subscriptions) has created this bizarre precedent that almost all other MMOs have been trying to get at ever since. I feel so sad that nearly every MMO I pick up nowadays is just relentlessly copying parts of WoW- even if I legitimately enjoy WoW.

I like EVE. That's my current game, and the things that it does (player based economy, alliances, free space that is conquerable, single-shard server) are really good for the genre, imho, and should be copied more than they are. Players creating their own game is much superior to the cookie-cutter 'go here, kill ten of these, come back for reward + xp' gamestyle of WoW.

I don't like co-operation very much in MMOs because usually I find people to be ultimately selfish no matter what. I know this isn't really the case 90% of the time, but I'm very suspicious these days of people.

Doesn't make me a very good person to join a corporation or guild, to be honest.

I hate how games aren't about games anymore. They aren't about delivering an enchanting, engrossing experience that gives you something to think about--some of them slap their own label on other games (Darksiders and Zelda) and some of them just update the graphics of their old games and re-release them (COD series). Others just have a fun gimmick and just ride it--super meat boy. When I play a game I don't want to be able to say "Oh, this is just x game with these few changes and different characters." I want to be able to play something new, something that reinvents a part of what games are.

I think a good example to contrast super meat boy and to illustrate the point I'm trying to make is "An Untitled Story." AUS has very simple controls--arrow keys and, later, z. it has simple, almost hand-drawn backgrounds and has some similarities to mario but it doesn't copy the game--it reinvents it. The storyline doesn't feel tacked-on to the mechanics of the game but is completely separate..you don't feel like you're passing levels but are rather having fluid conversations with the inhabitants of a village that depends on things you learned in the game world not through dialogue and through actions.

The creator of the game also did gameplay well--instead of just copying the mario games, the creator added a double-jump and things that can change one's trajectory (as well as a bullet later on in the game that goes straight and can be used to activate things). Yes, it's still somewhat similar but these things blend well-enough into the game that it keeps it challenging yet in a definitely different way than mario.

Another good example of what I'm trying to illustrate is portal. At its core, it's an FPS...but the gun doesn't kill. It's a puzzle game but with a definite goal and a narrator that doesn't just describe your surroundings and tell you what to do but rather fleshes out the story and draws you in to the environment. As the game progresses, you learn to lift cubes, shut down sentries and double jump with portals, as well as avoid water and control energy orbs...all these things, as well as the very enjoyable script for the narrator, help keep one engrossed in the game and help it from getting stale and becoming "just another x." I think this, something that keeps the player interested, engrossed, not through skinner-box rewards but through actual gameplay elements and characters, is what is sorely missing from many of today's releases. I don't want another "hold button until you win" game, I want something new, in all senses of the word, something that pulls me into its universe and doesn't let go due to poor controls, repetitive gameplay or stupid AI. Is that too much to ask?

I hate first person shooters. For some reason, they never seem fun or all that skill intensive to me. It's mainly (in my opinion) reflexes and little strategy. I don't find them fun at all, however I admit they can be good games. CoD and BF3 and games like that, though, are terrible.

I want to say the Mass Effect 3 ending. I was scared to beat until the new summer update to fix the ending. Everyone acted like it was the worse thing they have ever seen. I will say the ending was not the best, but wasn't that terrible. I understand how it left many loose ends. I just didn't think it ruined my ME experience that badly. Yes it wasn't the best ending, but everyone has their own interpretation of the ending. The game was amazing. I loved every second of it. I'm on m secong playthrough on Insanity finally.

The thing I hate about games are people who don't appreciate the whole game they are playing. The people I'm talking about are the ones that just play it once, don't fully explore the whole game and people who don't appreciate how much time and money went into playing a game. The other thing I hate about games are people who talk shit during the match like seriously, play games to have fun not to be an asshole. These are my two hates, your an awesome guy for doing this a second time!

I hate sliding difficulty. I hate how difficulty is used in most games as just an excuse to drag out the game. I know it's been like that since the arcade days. It's just pushed as a means to get people to replay the same content over again for more useless achievements and push your game time through the roof.

It's actually even worse when they'll give you the exact same game but make the hardest difficulty the "true ending" or have some other special content (which you can't unlock till at least 1 play-though) so as to really punish people for not honing their skills uselessly and going through the same game over again.

Just tell me a good story that I can interact with and don't drive me nuts.

I hate how games have strayed away from the adventure-genre. I used to love playing point and click games like the Lucasarts titles and Myst. This non-action genre seems to only exist in indie projects. People tend to get bored with these games today but I love them. I don't hate action games. I would just rather like to unwind and immerse myself in the story rather than the gameplay. You mentioned you did not like Bioshock and I agree. When I played that game, I felt that it could have been so much better if I just could wander around the world and uncover parts of the environment more by journals and such. I guess I just hate that developers will spend so much time creating a convincing atmosphere, but it is wasted on combat and speeding through objectives. If I won I would update my library with Dear Esther, The Dream Machine, Machinarium and other adventure titles.

I hate sandbox games. Dpm't get me wrong, I love the concept; an open world simulation like minecraft or GTA is awesome and whatnot, but the world has to have a goal; it can't just be LIVE AND LET LIVE!, or just a building creation kit.

When the game is something of a more linear style; such as L4D or a sidescroller Like SMB, it's quite simple; like a test.

I have two 'exceptions' to this personal rule. The first is point based sports games; I personally loved SSX5 (PS3) because it reminded me of my games of Tony Hawk, trying to find the hidden tape... getting the highest score immaginable. All the exploring I had to do, to work out the secret trick lines.

The other exception, although I'm not sure if it counts, are multiplayer games. TF2, I have racked up (mostly without regret) 2500 hours. "ow can you play a multiplayer game with no goal for so long?!" Two answers: Collecting and Friends.

TF2 was my first experience on a multiplayer game, of which I joined a server and made some fast friends. I'm closer to these people than anyone else in my life, and that's probably because of all the time I spent playing with them those two and a half years ago.

What keeps me playing is the collecting. I love my hats, and I don't want to leave due to all the time I've spent working for them. What was once my prize is now my prison... And I still play.

Anyway. The only redeeming qualities of sandbox games, are goal structure and cooperative gaming. GTA:SA had awesome goals, fun sidequests, and a fun time with the hidden multiplayer on the console versions (and the virus laden SA:MP mod on PC). All the ridiculous experiences due to us showing off or the time we had a badass final standoff against tanks and waves of cop cars. Why I can replay so many coop games and still have fun.

TL;DR Why I hate 'sandbox' and what redeeming qualities games can have to make it appeal to me.

For me, the achievement points are a nice bonus; They make me feel like I'm, well, achieving something. Collecting everything is compulsive for me... I'm not saying I have O.C.D. but I will definitely go out of my way to get everything, complete all the goals.

At this point it's one of the only ways I can have fun in a single player world.

This is true, I just can't bring myself to actually take part in the gathering.

I just don't care! But that's just me, some people aim to gather all the damn achievements. I just look at it and go "what's it do for me."

That being said, I really like it when I get an achievement for just playing. Not the kind where you get an achievement for completing fucking disk 1 or some shit like that, but when you get an achievement for doing something special but that you weren't particularly aiming for.

wow, people are writing entire essays about their hates. Interesting reads. Here's mine.
I hate the Half Life series. Which is weird. Because I'm an avid Team Fortress 2, portal, day of defeat, natural selection, counter-strike, the hidden, etc. fan. I ADORE everything that came out of the original half life. I've played so MANY half life mods. But half life? It has just NEVER clicked for me. And to be honest, I don't really know why. It just doesn't captivated me or held my attention. I'm waiting for the Black Mesa mod(which.....is operating on valve time apparently) to come so I can force myself to replay the entire series. But here's what REALLY annoys me. I know it's a good game. I can understand why it's so widely praised. But I don't like it. And it bugs me because I feel like my dislike of Half-Life is entirely irrational. And that's why I think this opinion is somewhat unique to myself.

Although I am not the only one on this: I hate games that cut corners. So often you will see developers being lazy and re using the same thing over and over again. I understand that for some big games you will re use something, but if you look at Risen 2 : the same few faces are re used all the time, or Oblibvion: The same dozen of voice actors do the voices for the entire game. It's just bad and it breaks immersion.

The thing I hate most about gaming in general would be blind devotion. Just because a company at some point put out a good game does not mean you need to stick by them through all the shit. This applies to all games, and most recently through the kickstarter trend. I personally loved Diablo II and will be giving the sequel a chance based on my interest in the series. If I don’t enjoy it, I will make it known and stop playing. When I was younger I might have possibly be known to “try out” games and make a final decision on purchasing after giving them a decent chance. Game demos don’t seem to exist in a fashion like they used to. Back to the kickstarter comment. I LOVED the old carmageddon series, but I in no way will be supporting them via kickstarter. While I know it is basically just a form of pre-ordering, I want to reserve judgement and the hit to my wallet after I get a better idea of what they are going to put out. I don’t want to blindly give them money because of a game I played forever ago. I might not have been the most well versed here, but I hope I got my point across 

Honestly, what I hate is the hate directed towards today's trending state of microtransactions in games!

Nearly everyone I have talked to about this despises the idea of such a system, stating that the company is out for extra money. However, for the most part, these games are mainly free to play to start with, and this provides an income for these companies that could not make such a project feasible otherwise.

Furthermore, there are a growing number of people who enjoy games, but now are not finding the time to play them so much! (Me included :d). Though this does not affect singleplayer games considerably in anyway, as you can just sit down and enjoy an hour of playing or so (Say, in the elder scrolls series), you find that in multiplayer games where items are unlocked you get behind in unlockables extremely quickly! For example, in Tribes: Ascend; this is a brilliant game, and recommend it to anyone, but you can find yourself outgunned and out equipped by your adversaries very quickly if you do not have the same gear. This gear is not really hard to come by through levelling, but if you have limited game time, you will find yourself in an out-geared battle, leading to less exp, leading to an even longer time to unlock more things. HOWEVER, microtransactions give the option for those who maybe have a job (hence less game time), to skip this step, and enjoy the game at the same level as others. Though it may be fun to get to that stage yourself, the option to buy your way there still stands, and it supports a great game company!

Now, there are lots of other issues within the microtransaction area (like better guns only available to buy, not through levelling) that I disagree with, but that can wait for another day, as I am procrastinating from finals revision... whoops!

Anyway, I hope you enjoy the read, and thanks for doing this! I found this subreddit today, and it looks great so far, good on you! I hope other contests are as interesting as this one.

You know what, I can't really think of anything wrong with a games or gaming in general. Maybe that some people turn into connoisseurs and get all snobby about other people playing games that don't appeal to them.

Maybe Mario Kart 7 is better, but I have better memories of Mario Kart DS.

Something I hate about games is the whole turn by turn style. I do not have that type of patience to watch the AI make their moves, especially when they are unskippable and long! (AHEM Pokemon!) I don't get why other people can like this repetitive game so much. Example: My friend buys Pokemon Diamond, AND Pearl. WHY?! They are the same game my friend!!! Just a different legendary you ended up hacking to get them anyways!

I do not understand the Skyrim love. It is no different than any other Bethesda, and I felt the story was very bland and predictable. Not to mention the fact that the game was incredibly easy if you used the skill tree correctly. And to top it off, the exploration was very lackluster. Almost every cave and dungeon seemed to just be copied and pasted into another part of the map

I dont know if Im eligible for participating on this contest (IM NOT "POPULAR" D:) but here goes:

I hate games, or rather gamers for just being so mad at each other when playing games cooperatively. See these 12-year old kids playing Call of Duty (I dont play it) for example, they are always shouting in the mic, writing curse words and just hating. I find it weird that they hate each other for playing the same game, if you know what I mean.
Also, when I see like footage of a certain game or console, I see most of the time arguments about the game or the console sucking hard in comparison to their god tier console. Why hating on stuff like that, over a almost common topic, we all play games and we like it, but we dont like other people playing their game of their interest appearently...
And one more thing I hate is that I hate short games. I dont like jumping in to a story and then a couple of hours later I complete the game and have nothing to do. I want to get sucked in to the story, live it to the fullest, and then be able to quit it. Take Portal 1 for instance, great game, really cool and everything. But too short... It ticks me off and that makes me a bit sad that they made such a great game short (sure, Portal 2 is longer, Im not done with it yet, but its still much longer).